威力彩玩法

Angela Merkel, Chancellor:

鈥淲e feel that the measures that we have taken in our clean air plan for 2017-2020 have been confirmed. We know that several of the concerned cities are not exceeding the [air pollution] thresholds significantly. The听听plays a major role in the ruling [by the Federal Administrative Court]. This means we can very quickly reduce emissions to comply with standards in most cities. What鈥檚 also important is that this is an issue in individual cities where more has to be done, but it really doesn鈥檛 concern the whole country and all car owners in Germany.鈥�

Barbara Hendricks (SPD), environment minister:

鈥淭he court has confirmed the right of the population to clean air in cities. [鈥�] This doesn鈥檛 mean there will be driving bans in cities tomorrow. My goal is not to have any driving bans at all. [鈥�] If we manage to turn this crisis into an opportunity, this will improve the quality of life in our cities. Retrofits of diesel cars could contribute to this, as long as they are technically feasible and economically sensible. [鈥�] I would consider it deeply unfair if car owners who recently bought a diesel car in good faith should now have to buy a new car. [鈥�] The carmakers are the perpetrators, and they mustn鈥檛 be relieved of their responsibility.鈥�

Thomas Strobl, interior minister, State of Baden-W眉rttemberg:

鈥淭he decision brings legal clarity. Now it鈥檚 about updating the clean air plans based on the reasoning behind the ruling, always paying particular attention to the principle of proportionality. Driving bans are not proportional, as long as there are other measures.鈥�

鈥淲e bet on clean air by using high technology, not by introducing bans. We are nowhere near to having exploited all possibilities 鈥� we can continue to improve the quality of air without driving bans.鈥�

鈥淲e will closely coordinate with the other federal states and municipalities. The looming patchwork of measures is in some way unreasonable for the citizens. So we have to do everything we can to prevent such bans.鈥�

Thomas Geisel, mayor of D眉sseldorf:

鈥淩egarding the question of whether or not there will be driving bans, the ball is now in the court of the regional governments. They must weigh 鈥� within the framework of updating the clean air plan 鈥� whether a diesel driving ban is the right measure to reduce nitrogen oxide levels below limits, while considering effectiveness, speed, and proportionality.鈥�

鈥淯nfortunately, it does not seem to matter in the court鈥檚 ruling that driving bans would present the affected municipalities with a practically unsolvable task, because such bans could only be implemented with extreme efforts, and can practically not be enforced.鈥� [听from 27.02]

Fritz Kuhn, mayor of Stuttgart:

鈥淚 welcome the fact that the Federal Administrative Court has come to a nuanced decision and found a balance between the fundamental questions and proportionality. As the highest [judicial] body, it has set the framework for driving bans and created clarity.鈥�

鈥淭he state of Baden-W眉rttemberg will now update the clean air plan and apply the principles of the decision. In the new version of the plan it will be determined, for which vehicles the driving bans will be effective and when they must be implemented.鈥�

鈥淚t will be difficult to implement the bans in this form in Stuttgart, because we have many jobs and trade in our inner city. It鈥檚 too bad that the federal government did not spare us all of this. By introducing a blue badge, the federal government could have long established legal and planning security. [鈥�] A disgrace for federal lawmakers.鈥� [听from 27.02.]

Volker Kauder, leader of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group in the Bundestag:

鈥淪ince there will not be a blanket diesel ban, the introduction of a blue badge is not necessary.鈥� [, 27.02.]

Joachim Pfeiffer, energy spokesperson of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group in the Bundestag:听

鈥淚鈥檓 not in favour of diesel driving bans and a sweeping condemnation of combustion engines, because driving bans alone don鈥檛 make the air in cities cleaner. We now have to prevent hasty reactions [鈥�] and stay focused on a factual debate. [鈥�]听
Germany is a global market leader in the automobile industry. In order to hold on to this strong competitive position and strengthen it in the future, we need to set the appropriate framework conditions.鈥�

J眉rgen Resch, head of NGO Environmental Action Germany (DUH), which initiated the legal case against the cities:

听鈥淭oday is a great day for clean air in Germany. The highest German administrative court has given the federal government a huge slap in the face. Angela Merkel must finally fight off the stranglehold of the car industry and govern in favour of the people suffering from poisonous diesel fumes, and the nine million betrayed buyers of Euro 5 and 6 diesel cars.鈥�

Germany鈥檚 General German Automobile Club (ADAC):

鈥淲e do not expect general driving bans for diesel drivers after the Federal Administrative Court鈥檚 decision in Leipzig. Technical hardware retrofits are now urgently needed. Air quality can only be improved with an all-encompassing package of solutions.鈥� - ADAC
鈥淭he decision of the Federal Administrative Court is the last chance for health and mobility. The judges in Leipzig decided that drivers will have to expect driving bans in especially polluted cities. To avoid this, Euro 5 diesels need to be retrofit as fast as possible, all forms of transport must be connected in a smart way, and public transport must be made more dependable.鈥� 鈥� ADAC Vice President Ulrich Klaus Becker said. [听from 27.02.]

Markus Lewe, president of the Association of German Cities:

鈥淲ith this decision, the pressure is mounting on the auto industry to make diesel passenger cars cleaner. The cities do not want driving bans. They are doing everything to prevent these. However, it鈥檚 above all the carmakers that need to solve the issue of excessive nitrogen oxide pollution, so that driving bans can be prevented. They are the main perpetrators, and they must finally deliver. We need to know the effectiveness of software updates. If that鈥檚 not enough, the auto industry must be obligated to perform hardware retrofits, and pay for these.鈥�
鈥淎fter the court鈥檚 ruling, we do not expect decisions in favour of short-term driving bans in cities, also because these can only be introduced step-by-step. What鈥檚 clear: under the Road Traffic Act, diesel driving bans are admissible. Now, it鈥檚 up to the federal states to earnestly examine, weigh, and adapt their clean air plans.鈥�
鈥淪elective driving bans could not be feasibly monitored. You cannot tell whether a car adheres to limits just by looking at it. We need a blue badge for this, to label cars with lower emissions. With a blue badge, it would be easier for cities to regulate exemptions, for example for delivery services and craftspeople.鈥� [听from 27.02.]

Leif Miller, head of NGO Nature and Biodiversity Conservation Union (NABU)

鈥淭he car industry has lost its game. The opinion many carmakers seem to have that government support and half-hearted software updates would suffice to drag themselves out of this affair has been crushed by the judges today.鈥�

Daniel Rieger, NABU transport expert

鈥淭he judgement illustrates the government鈥檚 failure, and especially that of the CSU-led transport ministry, to bring air quality in line with EU regulations and to prevent driving bans. Instead of saving the diesel by pretending that all will be fine, this [ruling] has merely increased the car owners鈥� uncertainty.鈥�

Joachim Lang, Federation of German Industries (BDI)

鈥淪imple solutions are only appear to be solutions (鈥�) Nobody wants to stymie health protection efforts in our country, but we also have to respect the property of millions of diesel car owners. Diesel cars are widely used in the fleets of companies, and they need legal and planning security. This situation could strike smaller companies at their core. Our point of view is that additional measures decided at the diesel summit should be implemented before driving bans actually take effect.鈥� [ from 27.02.]

Andreas Kuhlmann and Kristina Haverkamp, management of German Energy Agency (dena):

鈥淭he court decision has shifted the focus on short-term measures to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions. [鈥�] However important the current debate is, we should not lose track of the long-term and bigger challenge: reaching [the country鈥檚] climate targets in all sectors. Forty to 42 percent less CO鈧� emissions in transport by 2030 is a very ambitious goal. If we want to move forward, we now have to make the guiding decisions 鈥� in a broad dialogue with all relevant stakeholders. For this, the conservative CDU/CSU alliance and the SPD have envisioned a transport commission in their coalition agreement, which is to find solutions by early 2019. Let鈥檚 hope that with its help the government will manage to take the political initiative for the protection of the environment and the climate in transport.鈥� [, 27.02.]

听

听

Find background on the ruling in thearticle Court ruling opens door for diesel bans in German cities and the factsheet Diesel driving bans in Germany 鈥� The Q&A.

The factsheet "Dieselgate" - a timeline of Germany's car emissions fraud scandal traces the developments surrounding the manipulation of car emission data.

The 威力彩玩法 article Why the German diesel summit matters for climate and energy explains why the issue matters for Germany's energy transition.